[plt-scheme] xxx chooses MzScheme as preferred language

At Wed, 31 May 2006 13:59:23 -0700, "Williams, M. Douglas" wrote:
> > We've been revising the shootout tests to make them a bit more realistic
> > in terms of the tasks they perform,
> > as well as trying to make it harder for smart compilers like GHC to toss
> > aside useless computations.
> > 
> > -Brent
> 
> I personally would be afraid of losing all of my computations if a compiler
> tossed out the 'useless' ones.
> 
> Although seriously I would be interested in seeing how PLT Scheme performs
> against the others since the introduction of the JIT compiler, etc.  Also,
> has anyone done in recent measures of the computational impact of contracts?
> I'm just curious because I do use them a lot.

I don't think there is a good answer for this one, when asked in this
generality. Contracts add overhead proportional to their use and you
can control yourself how much checking there is (by changing the
contracts or moving them to different modules, etc).

That said, I think that there are more optimizations we could be doing
with contracts, but we aren't now because it requires more
sophisticated stuff in the module form and it hasn't seemed worth it
yet.

Robby